Defender General urges stakeholder review of S.186, warns plea change could saddle juveniles with criminal records
Loading...
Summary
Defender General Matt Valerio told the Senate Judiciary committee on Feb. 20 that S.186 should be reviewed by an existing juvenile-justice stakeholders group because, as drafted, it could encourage young defendants to accept criminal convictions with lasting collateral consequences; he recommended clearer drafting and judicial safeguards.
Matt Valerio, the Defender General, told the Senate Judiciary committee on Feb. 20 that the office is not opposed out of hand to S.186 but urged lawmakers to refer the bill to a longstanding juvenile-justice stakeholders group for review and drafting fixes before advancing it.
Valerio said he and his staff do not clearly see the problem the bill is intended to fix and that a multi-stakeholder review would surface the competing interests and practical pitfalls. "I'm unaware of the problem, if there is a problem," he told the committee, arguing that the informal group — which includes DCF, the Department of Corrections, state attorneys, sheriffs, the attorney general's office, judges and victims' advocates — is better positioned to weigh trade-offs and propose consensus language.
The sponsor of the bill told the committee the measure grew out of defense attorneys' experiences in which a person charged with a felony wants to plead to a lesser offense in criminal court but is told by a judge that "this can't happen in this division." The sponsor said the change is intended to allow certain lesser-included pleas where there is a nexus of conduct, and to avoid resolving unrelated charges inappropriately.
Kimmy Mattis, speaking for the record, urged a technical fix to the draft. She warned the wording "could be read as you can only plead to an offense other than one that you are brought in support for," and said the intent is to preserve defense counsel and juvenile options for resolving cases, not to restrict them.
Valerio recounted a historical example he said illustrates the danger of poorly framed plea options. He described a period when many young people accepted criminal convictions rather than diversion, producing downstream consequences such as driver's license suspensions and probation. "I was stunned that, like, 40 percent of people ended up on probation with the Department of Corrections," he said, urging caution to avoid repeating that outcome.
To address those risks, Valerio recommended safeguards in the bill, including a potential requirement that a judge make specific findings that a plea or disposition is in a juvenile's best interest and will not cause undue harm before permitting the change. He emphasized that his office might later give a more detailed critique of the draft if the committee prefers that route.
Committee members said they would place selected stakeholder comments on the committee agenda, solicit proposed changes to the bill language and then decide whether to send S.186 to the informal study group or to proceed with clarified language. Valerio offered to return and testify on the revised draft.
The committee paused for a five-minute break and planned to resume with another agenda item later in the morning.
